Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31567859›Full record

ArticleMedical care2019

Using Diagnoses to Estimate Health Care Cost Risk in Canada.

Yin Li, Sharada Weir, Mitch Steffler, Shaun Shaikh, James G Wright, Jasmin Kantarevic

Open access · hybridAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Association between virtual primary care and emergency department use during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2023
    Observational
  4. Observational
  5. Trends in prevalence of chronic disease and multimorbidity in Ontario, Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021
    Observational
  6. Use of the Population Grouping Methodology of the Canadian Institute for Health Information to predict high-cost health system users in Ontario.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yin LiDepartment of Economics, Policy & Research, Ontario Medical Association, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Sharada Weir
Mitch Steffler
Shaun Shaikh
James G Wright
Jasmin Kantarevic
Creative Commons · USMinistry of Health and Long Term Care · CACanadian Institute for Health Information · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveUntil recently, the options for summarizing Canadian patient complexity were limited to health risk predictive modeling tools developed outside of Canada. This study aims to validate a new model created by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) for Canada's health care environment. RESEARCH

designThis was a cohort study. SUBJECTS: The rolling population eligible for coverage under Ontario's Universal Provincial Health Insurance Program in the fiscal years (FYs) 2006/2007-2016/2017 (12-13 million annually) comprised the subjects. MEASURES: To evaluate model performance, we compared predicted cost risk at the individual level, on the basis of diagnosis history, with estimates of actual patient-level cost using "out-of-the-box" cost weights created by running the CIHI software "as is." We next considered whether performance could be improved by recalibrating the model weights, censoring outliers, or adding prior cost.

resultsWe were able to closely match model performance reported by CIHI for their 2010-2012 development sample (concurrent R=48.0%; prospective R=8.9%) and show that performance improved over time (concurrent R=51.9%; prospective R=9.7% in 2014-2016). Recalibrating the model did not substantively affect prospective period performance, even with the addition of prior cost and censoring of cost outliers. However, censoring substantively improved concurrent period explanatory power (from R=53.6% to 66.7%).

conclusionsWe validated the CIHI model for 2 periods, FYs 2010/2011-2012/2013 and FYs 2014/2015-2016/2017. Out-of-the-box model performance for Ontario was as good as that reported by CIHI for the development sample based on 3-province data (British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario). We found that performance was robust to variations in model specification, data sources, and time.

Indexed as

Models, EconomicCanadaCohort StudiesHealth Care CostsHumansRisk AssessmentStatistics as TopicUniversal Health Insurance

Identifiers

PMID31567859
PMCPMC6798736
OpenAlexW2973325067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.